Network News

Get the Morning Fix and the new Afternoon Fix delivered to your inbox or mobile device for easy access to the top political stories of the day. All you need is one click to get Morning Fix and Afternoon Fix!

The Most Important Number in Politics Today

Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin is the subject of a lengthy profile in the August issue of Vanity Fair. (AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta)

9,823

That's the number of words in Todd Purdum's opus on Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin in the August issue of Vanity Fair.

The piece is a massive examination of the enigma that is Palin, her political future and the 2012 presidential race. Writes Purdum succinctly: "Palin is at once the sexiest and the riskiest brand in the Republican Party."

Purdum's story is not -- at all -- favorable to the Alaska governor. It derides her "utter shortage of qualification" to be vice president, her "deep ignorance about most aspects of foreign and domestic policy" and calls her public life "an unholy amalgam of Desperate Housewives and Northern Exposure.

It details the lack of a relationship that Palin had with the staff she was given by John McCain once he chose her as vice president and features a scad of background quotes describing her as, among other things, a "whack job." (It's worth noting, however, that not a single former aide went on the record with Purdum -- a sign that Palin retains enough of a future in national politics that no ambitious operatives want to cross her.)

The best -- and most revealing -- section of Purdum's piece deals not with Palin's struggles on the national stage but rather the image of her back in Alaska.

That image was very much on Palin's mind throughout the 2008 campaign. In the days leading up to Palin's disastrous interview with CBS's Katie Couric, Purdum writes that the governor was more focused on filling out a questionnaire from the Alaska-based Frontiersman newspaper. Palin got so worried about her standing in the Last Frontier that McCain campaign manager Steve Schmidt decided to conduct a poll in the state to reassure Palin but when the poll was canceled due to other campaign needs, Palin was furious, according to Purdum.

Purdum concludes that Palin's experiences in Alaska government should have told McCain everything he needed to know about her (and why she would not be the campaign savior that the Arizona senator hoped she might be).

The central insight gleaned from a study of her rise in Alaska politics, writes Purdum, is that "no political principle or personal relationship is more sacred than her own ambition" -- pointing to a series of moves during the early part of this decade and in her 2006 run for governor in which Palin re-positioned herself to be more appealing to voters despite past pronouncements.

Palin's time in the Alaska government may also prove instructive when trying to understand where she goes from here on the national stage. Many close observers of Palin's political career say that she appears to be following the same blueprint she used to great effect in Alaska. John Bitney, a longtime friend and adviser to Palin now estranged, told Purdum that Palin is seeking to establish a "political beachhead" among the most conservative elements of the party and then build from there.

Perhaps. But Purdum rightly casts doubt on Palin's ability to win a presidential nomination if she hews to her current course.

"Sarah Palin is a star in Evansville and all the many Evansvilles of America, but there is a big part of the Republican Party -- the Wall Street wing, the national security wing -- in which she cuts no ice," he writes.

Figuring out how -- and whether -- Palin can play to country club Republicans, fiscal conservatives and the establishment wing of the party is the central question of the next few years for the Alaska Governor and her allies.

Lots of GOP have now gone "on the record" to rebut the anonymous claims in this article -- thank you, Mr. Purdum -- the law of unintended consequences strikes again. In 3 1/2 years, I hope you all remember this article as the moment that changed the course of history.

Now that it's just you and me (no one is commenting on the article anyway): what do you think of the argument that Gov. Palin (or any female) cannot legally become President of the United States because there's no provision in the 19th Amendment (women's suffrage) to change Art. II in that regard?

No, those are not "lies" either. You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means (just like "standard deviation").

Posted by: JakeD
>>>>>>>>>>>

If you don't fit the "stupid and uneducated" meme, then chrissuxcox and the rest of the loony libs are out of ammo. notice no actual argument or debate, simply name calling and put downs. If you are smarter than a Lib, you are by necessity, a Liar. there can be no other answer in Lib world.

None of that was even included in the article you are commenting on -- although there was a slight mention "The state capital, Juneau, is 600 miles from the principal city, Anchorage, and is reachable only by air or sea" -- did you read the article?

No, DAStubbs, I didn't "lie" and neither am I continuing Palin's "lies". Nice try though. As for Franken, the earliest he could be seated is next week anyway with the Senate out of session. Coleman will hoepfully announce that he will appeal to the UNITED STATES Supreme Court before that. Sorry to rain on your parade libs.

Looks like KOZ took care of business while I went to eat. Great job!

P.S. to Independent4tw: I didn't expect that you would actually answer my question. Have a nice life.

I am surprised at you chrissuxcox.
you of all people should understand that when talking about deviations, you need a frame of reference. you being an utter deviant, probably simply assumed that we need not talk about what our frame of reference is.

But to talk about standard deviations without mentioning the mean leaves out the most important measure of deviation - deviations from what?

today I have been brushing up on Lagrangian multipliers. Perhaps you know a little nothing about them too.

did you get one of those mail order degrees qwith the picture of a teddy bear in the corner.

and to conclude demolishing another moonbat idiocy - mathematicians can be statisticians and vice versa. One is simply a subset of the other.

Once again, post a story on Sarah Palin and people will want to speak their mind.

Chris posted a story on Sonia Sotomayor at around 5 this morning. Then, 6 and 1/2 hours later, he posts a story on Sarah Palin. It's nearly 3:00, now, and there are more than twice as many comments on the Palin piece as there are on Sotomayor piece.

There's an old saying that bad reviews are better than no reviews. It looks like Sarah Palin's going to be around for quite a while.

Mathemticians refer to standard deviations from the mean. that implies that 2 sd from the mean (on both sides, sometimes called a confidence interval) include 4 total. It is incorrect to say 4 SDs include 96%.

==

(1) Statisticians, not mathematicians.

(2) confidence intervals are not restricted to normal distributions, they are evaluable in every distribution

(3) 95% of a normal distribution lies within a span of four standard deviations, two on each side of the mean.

You made a simple mistake. I'm not going to argue all day with you about it, even if you weren't a complete idiot

Palin: Yes, she's sexy when compared to Kay Bailey Hutchinson and Olympia Snowe, but the minute she open's her mouth.... Of course, is one is into dominatrixes, that's another story.

Seriously, though, one must look at the bigger picture: The Republican Party is currently in decline, not DESPITE its strong evangelical base, but BECAUSE of it. For Palin to stake her claim (gold rush allusion accidental) to the extreme right is akin to Al Jolson wanting to do The Jazz Singer in pantomime or for Louis Armstrong to want to perform on the harpsichord!

Politics have not only micro-repetitive cycles, that we all recognise, but greater macro-trends which do not mimic those trends which went before. Thus, just as the almost laughable Democratic ultraliberal ways of the 1960s were ultimately rejected by the electorate in 1980 (with the election of Reagan), the same electorate by 2006 had moved past the Goldwater/Reaganesque (and far more extreme and mean-spirited Gingrichesque) Conservatism.

The politically-organised evangelicals who were so essential to Republican victories in the 1980s and 1990s are now a political albatross around the necks of members of that party--though those who know it haven't succeeded inmaking their voices heard.

If Purdum is indeed right, that in Palin's case 'no political principle or personal relationship is more sacred than her own ambition', she is going about it the wrong way: she should be moving AWAY from the far right, not TOWARDS it.

This (among a great deal of other baggage) is Palin's (near-insoluable) problem, as it also is for the Republican party as a whole. When will they learn?

Mathemticians refer to standard deviations from the mean. that implies that 2 sd from the mean (on both sides, sometimes called a confidence interval) include 4 total. It is incorrect to say 4 SDs include 96%.

Mathemticians refer to standard deviations from the mean. that implies that 2 sd from the mean (on both sides, sometimes called a confidence interval) include 4 total. It is incorrect to say 4 SDs include 96%.

but I presume with your IQ, you think you know so much and in fact know almost nothing. typical Lib.

another Lib scholar - Barry, supposedly a "constitutional scholar" never published one single paper. That is pretty typical of Lib scholarship. "but he is so smart". Yeah right.

I actually liked McCain, but Sarah is just a pretty-faced puppet that is being used to make look at her face instead of her words.

==

Colin Powell's elective lie at the UN came to overshadow a long career of stellar service.

McCain's choice of a Sarah Palin as his VP overshadows his career in the same way, and it wasn't in the same league as Powell's. McCain's judgment is forever suspect, for the wanton irresponsibility of trying to put a vicious and stupid woman a heartbeat from the presidency.

I'd MUCH rather have an intelligent, successful businessman as president during this economic time than a community organizer who has never run even the smallest of businesses.

==

I'd rather have a vastly successful campaigner and constitutional scholar looking out for American jobs than a guy who made his fortune acquiring and breaking up businesses, firing even the most hard-working, and who champions outsourcing.

If Romney ran there would be thousands ready to step forward and talk to the press about how Romney as head of Bain broke up companies for short term gain, and fired thousands of people.

Independent - do you always lecture others about things you know nothing about?

IQ is a number that supposedly stays fairly constant over the course of an individuals life. It is measured as a percentage of intelligence compared to the rest of the population - for example 100 is exactly average and 140 is 40% higher than average, while 60 is 40% lower than average.

now the law of large numbers in statisticsa requires that for human phenomenon, all Normal curves contain about 94% of the population within two SDs. I realize I have left the political scientists behind and the imbecilic Libs, but I forge on. therefor, a true genius (e.g. king of zouk) with an IQ over 160 is incredibly rare, despite the claims of every Lib that ever lived. At the same time, you my friend are also quite "special" with your marginal score of 35. I know they told you to put a one in front. you are definitely making progress.

Keep sharpening those crayons.

you see dimwit, I studied cognitive science in my PhD program.

When you were in skul, were you able to move the chair and reach the banana?

I knew what imbecile meant when I typed it. I said that 18% of America has an IQ of 25-75 points, which is just an estimate. It is more likely that there are MORE then that many imbeciles in this country.

==

Intelligence follows a normal distribution ("bell curve"), with ten IQ points comprising a standard deviation. This is by design.

90 - 110 - 67%

80 - 120 - 95%

70 - 130 - 99.7%

So ~17% have IQs under 90, and it's a safe bet that this is where the majority of Palin support is found.

Anyone who would think that Mitt Romney would play second banana to this bimbo seriously needs to change his meds

==

.. and his diaper.

Lest we forget, Romney is "businessman," and nothing more. The moment the numbers said he couldn't win, he dropped out (and bawled like a baby doing so, a tape that would get a lot of play should he decide to try again).

It doesn't take a top-of-the-line calculator to figure that Palin would hurt his chances. He wouldn't choose her.

Not that he has a shot himself.

Posted by: chrisfox8 | June 30, 2009 2:07 PM | Report abuse
====================================
I'd MUCH rather have an intelligent, successful businessman as president during this economic time than a community organizer who has never run even the smallest of businesses.

He also notes that Todd and Sarah could not recall exactly what health insurance coverage they had 20 years ago. No a single other example, of course, is given in the article of Gov. Palin being "casual about the truth".

==================================

That's a lie you just told, Jake. You're continuing Palin's lying.

Palin didn't tell McCain aids "I can't remember what coverage we had." What she told McCain was "We had NO insurance coverage." Then when caught in the lie, Palin didn't want anyone to mention the facts.

You should at least read an article before you start trashing it. That's expecting way more than your capability.

Alan Carlin, the senior EPA research analyst who authored a study critical of global warming that was suppressed by agency officials, has broken his silence and spoken on Fox News about his situation. Carlin told ''Fox & Friends'' Steve Ducy and Gretchen Carlson that his most important conclusion in the study was that the U.S. should not rely upon recommendations of the UN in making policy decisions regarding global warming.

Do you not care that she knows nothing about science and politics except for what the GOP tells her to say?

==

The 18-percenters have a one-dimensional view of science: global warming, with a subtext of denying bibblecal mythology. They have no use for science or scientists except in their capacity to develop weapons, and to determine what a man is thinking against his will.

the "highly intelligent " Lib who claims to know a lot about stuff like word meanings and maybe even math and science has no notion that 18% is different than 3%, has no notion of the meaning of the word imbecile, which he throws around callously, and probably doesn't know what a sun spot is or what it does.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | June 30, 2009 2:05 PM |
-----------

An idiot is someone with the mental age of 0-3 years old.

An imbecile, like Sarah Palin supporters, have the mental age of 3-7 years old.

A moron has the mental age of 8-11 years old.

I knew what imbecile meant when I typed it. I said that 18% of America has an IQ of 25-75 points, which is just an estimate. It is more likely that there are MORE then that many imbeciles in this country.

Where did you get your 3% figure at? Just make that up? Please show me some citations.

But you are getting me of course...

Lets start over...

Sarah Palin is a Moron. People who like her must be less intelligent then her, therefore they are imbeciles.

How many tries does it take a moron to graduate college? I dunno, but I know she attended 5 colleges in 4 years.

"No" is not an ANSWER to the question "How about you [where did you graduate from law school]?" Keep in mind that YOU started this by questioning if I even graduated from high school. No big surprise that you can't finish what you started though.

If it helps, I will answer your questions as well. That way, everyone will see you have no excuse in failing to answer my question to you:

1) No, the "Abortion issues" are not the only reasons I would vote Palin for President.

2) All other things being equal, the midget.

3) She knows about oil-gas production, so I reject the premise: "Do you not care that she knows nothing about science and politics except for what the GOP tells her to say?" Even if that were true, and she was only pro-life, I would still vote for her.

4) I like puppets (especially that Terry Fader guy we saw in Vegas) because he was seriously entertaining. Gov. Palin (according to the very article you are commenting on) is NOT a "puppet".

Anyone who would think that Mitt Romney would play second banana to this bimbo seriously needs to change his meds

==

.. and his diaper.

Lest we forget, Romney is "businessman," and nothing more. The moment the numbers said he couldn't win, he dropped out (and bawled like a baby doing so, a tape that would get a lot of play should he decide to try again).

It doesn't take a top-of-the-line calculator to figure that Palin would hurt his chances. He wouldn't choose her.

the "highly intelligent " Lib who claims to know a lot about stuff like word meanings and maybe even math and science has no notion that 18% is different than 3%, has no notion of the meaning of the word imbecile, which he throws around callously, and probably doesn't know what a sun spot is or what it does.

Psychology. a person of the second order in a former classification of mental retardation, above the level of idiocy, having a mental age of seven or eight years and an intelligence quotient of 25 to 50.

So according to statistics and psychology, the slice of the population that could fit into the definition on imbecile is something less than 3% of the population. that roughly coincides with the sample that thinks Peloony is doing a good job.

you will note that according to the exact definition, imbeciles are still smarter than drivl, chrissuxcox and Independent4tw, the idiots of this blog.

But I guess you never were learned too good in that skul you went.

to those if us who did, it is clear enough.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | June 30, 2009 2:00 PM
-----------
Interesting science you used there. I have an IQ of 135 as of 3 months ago, how exactly do you figure out that 25<135<75?

That first number, the "1", means that you add "100" to the total. I think they taught this that day you were eating paste.

You should have kept reading my posts (did you read the article where Purdum makes a big deal about Palin advisor, John Coale, being married to Greta Van Susteren, the Fox News host who went to interview her during the campaign?). I report, you decide.

Psychology. a person of the second order in a former classification of mental retardation, above the level of idiocy, having a mental age of seven or eight years and an intelligence quotient of 25 to 50.

So according to statistics and psychology, the slice of the population that could fit into the definition on imbecile is something less than 3% of the population. that roughly coincides with the sample that thinks Peloony is doing a good job.

you will note that according to the exact definition, imbeciles are still smarter than drivl, chrissuxcox and Independent4tw, the idiots of this blog.

I am glad that you pointed out the typo because you couldn't argue with the fact that people who like Sarah Palin are probably the same people who never took any advanced education.

How do you survive when you didn't even graduate high school? It must be hard to be that dumb.

But then again, they say ignorance is bliss. Maybe that is how you can justify voting for such an obvious idiot, because you are ignorant to what she would do anyway, so why would you care. At least it is a pretty face to look at when she is giving speeches filled with words that you do not understand.

That's the sorry story as Honduras' now ex-president, Mel Zelaya, last Thursday defied a Supreme Court ruling and tried to hold a "survey" to rewrite the constitution for his permanent re-election. It's the same blueprint for a rigged political system that's made former democracies like Venezuela, Bolivia, Nicaragua and Ecuador into shells of free countries.

Zelaya's operatives did their dirt all the way through. First they got signatures to launch the "citizen's power" survey through threats — warning those who didn't sign that they'd be denied medical care and worse. Zelaya then had the ballots flown to Tegucigalpa on Venezuelan planes. After his move was declared illegal by the Supreme Court, he tried to do it anyway.

As a result of his brazen disregard for the law, Zelaya found himself escorted from office by the military Sunday morning, and into exile. Venezuela's Hugo Chavez and Cuba's Fidel Castro rushed to blame the U.S., calling it a "yanqui coup."

President Obama on Monday called the action "not legal," and claimed that Zelaya is still the legitimate president.

There was a coup all right, but it wasn't committed by the U.S. or the Honduran court. It was committed by Zelaya himself. He brazenly defied the law, and Hondurans overwhelmingly supported his removal (a pro-Zelaya rally Monday drew a mere 200 acolytes).

Yet the U.S. administration stood with Chavez and Castro, calling Zelaya's lawful removal "a coup." Obama called the action a "terrible precedent," and said Zelaya remains president.

In doing this, the U.S. condemned democrats who stood up to save their democracy, a move that should have been hailed as a historic turning of the tide against the false democracies of the region.

The U.S. response has been disgraceful. "We recognize Zelaya as the duly elected and constitutional president of Honduras. We see no other," a State Department official told reporters.

Worse, the U.S. now contemplates sanctions on the tiny drug-plagued, dirt-poor country of 7 million, threatening to halt its $200 million in U.S. aid, immigration accords and a free-trade treaty if it doesn't put the criminal Zelaya back into office.

Not even Nicaragua, a country the State Department said committed a truly fraudulent election, got that. Nor has murderous Iran gotten such punishment, even as it slaughters Iranian democrats in the streets. But tiny Honduras must be made to pay.

ALEXANDRIA, VA. -- A company created by the wife of former Rep. William Jefferson billed a Kentucky technology firm for thousands of dollars in consulting fees without spending a dime on office space, travel, gas, stamps or a single employee, the congressman's former accountant testified Monday.

Lefty journalist Todd Purdum has a hit piece in the new Vanity Fair on Sarah Palin. You don’t have to be a big Palin fan to recognize the article is full of dubious claims, and is dependent on self-serving stories provided on background by some of the people who ran the McCain campaign into the ground.

At least she has run a business and made lots of money on her own. that would be the first Lib in government with that accomplishment. Poor Barry is only good at spending OPM and living it up like a banana dictator.

I'm not sure who "they" is meant to be, but HRC was - and still is - a lightning rod of fear and hatred (see http://www.hillarythemovie.com/ for an image of HRC as the Antichrist). I suspect that our first female president, though, will be someone for which her sex is not a predominant part of her campaign. But, the Republican Party would need to change. Why, for example, is Olympia Snowe so marginalized? She has the highest home approval rating of all senators, is a hawk, supports the Cuba embargo... She is a younger, more rational McCain.

"There are several scenarios whereby Palin is elected President of the United States."

===

Maybe in a Harry Turtledove novel, but not in real life. Once you get past the roughly 18% of the country who think the Earth is just over 6,000 years old, the rest of the electorate will likely stampede in a different direction.

And while it is mathematically possible to win the Electoral College with 18% of the popular vote, the odds are about the same that every dinosaur on the planet died during a world-wide flood in 2843 B.C.

Even a broken clock is right twice a day (three times on daylight savings day). Luckily, "President" Obama has set the precedent that Constitutional pre-requisites like age or natural-born citizenshipo don't matter -- run Britney Spears NOW!!!

For instance, Mr. Purdum does not seem to know that every State's Chief Executive has a "first family" -- if he does, or didn't bother checking with his own wife -- that sets the whole tone of this article. He also notes that Todd and Sarah could not recall exactly what health insurance coverage they had 20 years ago. No a single other example, of course, is given in the article of Gov. Palin being "casual about the truth". From the article:

"Palin worked hard, and the results were adequate. Palin’s winking 'Can I call you Joe?' performance against Biden was nothing like a disaster."

Of course, I thought that Gov. Palin WON that debate. It's an interesting "hit piece" but that's about all.

This topic always gets all the loons riled up. Just watch what the misanthrope chrissuxcox posts over and over, the extent of the contents of his tiny cranium is startling in its simplicity.

Yet he projects this onto other highly succesful people whom he does not know in the least. all the evidence points out that the loser must be the stooge who posts the same slop here day after day without a break for intelligent thought, not the Governor of a State and the VP nominee of a major party.

but then facts never were your strong point dimwit.

Rant, rant, rave. show us what an ignoramus you are. Again. or should I say as usual.

JakeD, thank you for the pointer, but no, I don't want to discuss Obama's citizenship. I also don't want to discuss whether the Apollo moon mission was staged, whether the CIA was behind the Kennedy assassination or whether the US has transferred sovereignty of various national parks to a world government. I'm not saying that there's plenty of interesting things to discuss here, but I just don't want to be part of it. Thanks.

Purdum's article is interesting, but not what I was hoping for. It's more pop psychology than the inner workings of politics.

However, while she could possibly win the Republican nomination she would never be elected president. She is too strongly identified with social conservatism for the electorate at large and will never live down the Katie Couric interview outside Alaska.

McCain-Palin got the vote total they did because of McCain, not Palin. And while she may have shored up the conservative base, it's fairly clear at this point she cost him dearly with independents.

It's moot, though, as the people who really run the machinery of the Republican party are business conservatives. They will do everything they can to exploit her popularity with social conservatives but will do their very best (e.g. worst) to make sure Mitt Romney or someone like him (e.g. a business-friendly conservative who isn't cheating on his wife) is the Republican nominee in 2012.

Watch this thread fill up with support for Palin from all the crazies. JakeD's already manning the defense quite well; he reminds me of a schoolboy who gets all mad & flustered when the girl he has a secret crush on gets criticized.

Another FACT ("stubborn things" as quoted by the author of this hit piece):

McCain-Palin got more votes than any other Republicans in history (short of Bush-Cheney). If you libs don't think it's even possible that she could be elected President -- especially considering the direction our economy is taking, or a variety of other factors -- I'm certainly not going to convince you otherwise.

Here's what former President Clinton said (in reference to Purdum): "He's a really dishonest reporter ... and I haven't read (previous hit piece). There's just five or six blatant lies in there. But he's a real slimy guy." When Clinton was reminded that Purdum is married to his former press secretary, he responded: "That's all right - he's still a scumbag" and later added "He's just a dishonest guy - can't help it."

"Confident" people don't whine about little slights like Palin does. "Confident" people in the public eye roll with the punches. Palin's reaction to Letterman's joke about Bristol was the act of a deeply insecure person.

Another FACT is that the author of this hit piece is married to DEE DEE MEYERS -- you all remember her, right -- Press Secretary for Bill Clinton. Until late 2005, Mr. Purdum was a reporter and the Los Angeles bureau chief for the New York Times. From 1994 to 1997, Purdum was a White House correspondent for the Times.

Palin was mayor of a sh*tty little town of single-wides housing a lot of meth addicts, and governor of a state with the population of Memphis. She's not even half-educated, she's incurious, ambitious, believes in exorcists and End Times lunacy, and she's dumb.

She's also vicious, vengeful, and petty. She's as qualified for national office as I am to be the next Pope. And about as likely to get there.

Please by all means keep her in the spotlight, let's all watch age catch up to her and let her do her ample part in keeping the GOP out of power for generations to come.

It is a FACT than Obama had ZERO executive experience -- anyone with even city executive experience was more "qualified" in that regard -- alas, this thread is about Palin. No modern-era politician has risen as fast as Gov. Palin. She would get more votes for President than South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham (Mr. Cillizza's last "best hope" for the GOP ; )

If you want to discuss Obama (and legitimate questions about his birthplace), please see the previous thread:

"Gov. Palin had more qualifications to be Vice-President than Obama did to be President (even assuming he is a natural-born citizen)."

Here it is, the Standard Answer! It's like asking someone "Which person has influenced you the most?" - if they answer "Jesus" then you know you are talking with a fundamentalist. If someone says Palin had more qualifications than Obama or hints that Obama is not a natural-born citizen, you know you are talking with... a fundamentalist Republican!

Thanks for the link to Purdum's article - it sounds like a great treatise on sausage making.